On 8/22/2018 4:15 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Aug 21 19:57, cyg Simple wrote: >> On 8/21/2018 4:13 PM, Andrey Repin wrote: >>> Greetings, cyg Simple! >>> >>>> During the testing at least one of the tests does `setfacl -m group:0:1 >>>> tmpfile0`. Obviously this gets a 'permission denied' error as group 0 >>>> doesn't exist. What do you suggest for reasonable replacement for 0? >>> >>> Nothing. Not all systems have a concept of "group 0". Just skip this test. >> >> I'm not interested in skipping the test; after all the path for the test >> is Cygwin specific. It's just not the correct thing to do for the >> Cygwin specific path. I believe 11 to be the correct test and will >> pursue that upstream. Marco suggested maybe 544(Administrator) but that >> doesn't work with a typical user build while doing the same in Linux for >> root group 0 as a typical user I would need to have elevated privilege >> in Windows to use 544. > > Exactly as on another system when using group 0. If these tests are > really only performed on Cygwin, I don't know what the creator intended.
Cygwin is treated specifically to do this instead of that. As I review more cases of the specifically treated Cygwin I think the tests are old as setfacl options being used don't exist today. > Otherwise, if you want to reproduce what the testcase did, you should in > fact use an admin group. That depends on the purpose of the test and based on the comments the testing could use any group. It should also check that the /tmp filesystem can support ACL as it assumes /tmp to be locally mounted and skip the testing if not. -- cyg Simple -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
